Despite the doublespeak used by Hardik Patel, the leader of the Patidar Anamat Andolan Samiti, it is abundantly clear that his campaign is not for, but against, reservations. The 22-year-old argues that Patels deserve reservations like Dalits because some Patels, like Dalits, are economically backward. If Patels don’t get reservations, he believes, nobody should.
Of course, the major flaw in this position is that reservation is supposed to correct under-representation caused due to centuries of discrimination, not economic backwardness. With the Patels being over-represented in the elite groups that dominate the polity and economy of Gujarat, a quota for them appears to be an unfounded demand.
But let us start from the beginning. Economic backwardness is not considered a ground for awarding quotas because a person can possibly alleviate his economic status, but it’s impossible to alleviate historical discriminations like caste status. A poor Dalit in our society is just not equal to a poor Brahmin.
Part of the reason reservation seems unjust to some is that they think of caste discrimination as a thing of the past. Unfortunately, it is still very prevalent. Don’t be deceived into thinking that discrimination occurs only in remote villages.
For instance, in 2012, a study found that despite six decades of entry-level quotas in government jobs, out of the 88 secretary-level posts in the central government, not one was filled by a Dalit. This is why reservations are needed to correct under-representations in a democracy that must necessarily represent all.
The creamy layer
Even so, I can see why some students may feel wronged because someone else with a lower percentage gets into an educational institute ahead of them. However, they must realise that with or without reservations, most of them would probably not get a seat. At the All India Institute of Medical Science, for instance, there are about 15,000 applicants for merely 200 seats. It is easy to see that there are bound to be a lot of disappointed applicants every year. Only a miniscule percentage doesn’t get in because of reservations.
The main argument put forth by those opposing reservations is that, notwithstanding how big or small the quota, it still dilutes merit. It still takes away from meritorious admissions, they say. Somehow these same people do not organise huge protests every year against paid seats or management quota, which is reservation purely for the privileged. Somehow that seems fair, but correcting years and years of injustice seems unjust.
Having said this, there are several lower caste individuals who have managed to come up in society, and yet their children and children’s children continue to take up most of the reserved seats. These people constitute what is called the creamy layer of lower castes. These individuals are in a far less disadvantaged position than a poor Brahmin boy, and it is clear that they should be excluded from the quota. However, because of vote bank politics, these privileged lower castes continue to avail of quotas, in the process doing a disservice to their own communities, not just by capturing quota seats, but also by suddenly making the debate all about economic backwardness.
But economic backwardness is just one obstacle in getting a good education or a good job. Gender, the kind of school one has attended, geographical location and, of course, caste are all barriers to getting ahead.
Alternative solutions
A professor at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, Purushottam Agarwal, once came up with what he called the Multiple Index Related Affirmative Action scheme that was implemented in the varsity for a short while. This scheme acknowledged that caste is only one criteria by which someone can be termed underprivileged.
According to his system, while every candidate was granted entry based on their score, the score itself was adjusted based on other factors. The exam percentage was the major chunk of your score, but you could additionally be awarded up to a maximum of 30 points based on other criteria. If you were from a Schedule Caste or Scheduled Tribe, you would get 5 additional points. Five points were given to women, four points if both your parents were uneducated, five points if you came from an extremely backward region of the country, six points if you fell below certain economic criteria, and five points if you studied at a panchayat school. Not everybody would get all these points and not everybody would score a full five in each category even if they did qualify. The scores in each category ranged from zero to five or six. So if a student scored, say, 50% in the exam and gained additional 20 points, taking the total to 70%, she could still not compete with someone getting 90%. Still, this gave them a fighting chance to get ahead.
Whether or not you agree with Professor Agarwal’s method of affirmative action, the point remains that affirmative action is needed in this country. Instead of screaming hoarse for the abolishment of quotas, we should come up with alternative solutions to empower those communities that have for centuries been at the receiving end of injustices.
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
Of course, the major flaw in this position is that reservation is supposed to correct under-representation caused due to centuries of discrimination, not economic backwardness. With the Patels being over-represented in the elite groups that dominate the polity and economy of Gujarat, a quota for them appears to be an unfounded demand.
But let us start from the beginning. Economic backwardness is not considered a ground for awarding quotas because a person can possibly alleviate his economic status, but it’s impossible to alleviate historical discriminations like caste status. A poor Dalit in our society is just not equal to a poor Brahmin.
Part of the reason reservation seems unjust to some is that they think of caste discrimination as a thing of the past. Unfortunately, it is still very prevalent. Don’t be deceived into thinking that discrimination occurs only in remote villages.
For instance, in 2012, a study found that despite six decades of entry-level quotas in government jobs, out of the 88 secretary-level posts in the central government, not one was filled by a Dalit. This is why reservations are needed to correct under-representations in a democracy that must necessarily represent all.
The creamy layer
Even so, I can see why some students may feel wronged because someone else with a lower percentage gets into an educational institute ahead of them. However, they must realise that with or without reservations, most of them would probably not get a seat. At the All India Institute of Medical Science, for instance, there are about 15,000 applicants for merely 200 seats. It is easy to see that there are bound to be a lot of disappointed applicants every year. Only a miniscule percentage doesn’t get in because of reservations.
The main argument put forth by those opposing reservations is that, notwithstanding how big or small the quota, it still dilutes merit. It still takes away from meritorious admissions, they say. Somehow these same people do not organise huge protests every year against paid seats or management quota, which is reservation purely for the privileged. Somehow that seems fair, but correcting years and years of injustice seems unjust.
Having said this, there are several lower caste individuals who have managed to come up in society, and yet their children and children’s children continue to take up most of the reserved seats. These people constitute what is called the creamy layer of lower castes. These individuals are in a far less disadvantaged position than a poor Brahmin boy, and it is clear that they should be excluded from the quota. However, because of vote bank politics, these privileged lower castes continue to avail of quotas, in the process doing a disservice to their own communities, not just by capturing quota seats, but also by suddenly making the debate all about economic backwardness.
But economic backwardness is just one obstacle in getting a good education or a good job. Gender, the kind of school one has attended, geographical location and, of course, caste are all barriers to getting ahead.
Alternative solutions
A professor at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, Purushottam Agarwal, once came up with what he called the Multiple Index Related Affirmative Action scheme that was implemented in the varsity for a short while. This scheme acknowledged that caste is only one criteria by which someone can be termed underprivileged.
According to his system, while every candidate was granted entry based on their score, the score itself was adjusted based on other factors. The exam percentage was the major chunk of your score, but you could additionally be awarded up to a maximum of 30 points based on other criteria. If you were from a Schedule Caste or Scheduled Tribe, you would get 5 additional points. Five points were given to women, four points if both your parents were uneducated, five points if you came from an extremely backward region of the country, six points if you fell below certain economic criteria, and five points if you studied at a panchayat school. Not everybody would get all these points and not everybody would score a full five in each category even if they did qualify. The scores in each category ranged from zero to five or six. So if a student scored, say, 50% in the exam and gained additional 20 points, taking the total to 70%, she could still not compete with someone getting 90%. Still, this gave them a fighting chance to get ahead.
Whether or not you agree with Professor Agarwal’s method of affirmative action, the point remains that affirmative action is needed in this country. Instead of screaming hoarse for the abolishment of quotas, we should come up with alternative solutions to empower those communities that have for centuries been at the receiving end of injustices.
